 |
| Will you be drinking recycled sewage water so that we can build an Urban Marin? |
Editor's Note: I sent the article on
" Why Californians Will Soon Be Drinking Their Own Pee " to a friend this morning.
Here is their response:
===============
Thanks for your note. I appreciate it.
My two cents on water and Plan Bay Area (a favorite topic
of mine):
If folks are interested in water, here are two good books
on the topic:
* The author of "The Man Who Made it Rain"
discusses water issues in Marin
* "Cadillac Desert" gives a more broad view of
water in California with some good history
"Plan Bay Area: Caps your Life, Trades your Freedom".
We live in a semi-arid State and for decades have built
infrastructure to move water from source to demand areas. There are many issues
surrounding water for nature, water pollution and water supply. More on this if
you are interested.
Few people know that they are already drinking effluent
from wastewater treatment plants which discharge tertiary treated wastewater
into rivers throughout the State including the Sacramento and San Jacinto
rivers. That water is then taken out of the rivers downstream for treatment as
a drinking water supply. These rivers drain into the Delta, a source for many
water supply agencies. Here's a link to a map of the rivers of California: http://geology.com/lakes-rivers-water/california.shtml
The good thing about water is that it can be purified
from the worst condition using a variety of techniques. The natural treatment
of water happens everyday through the hydrologic cycle. The only real issue is
cost, as we have need to accelerate this natural purification process to meet
demand.
Water reuse has been billed as a "drought
proof" supply and so, in my view, should allow us to maintain our current
use of water. Others see this supply as a means to support more growth or
provide water for nature.
In my view, what we Americans are facing, is the
contrived, political creation of scarcity in the USA. The politics of scarcity
can be viewed as the unavailability of resources required to sustain life, such
as food, energy, or water and can undermine security in degrees similar to
military aggression.
If I understand it correctly, taking Plan Bay Area and
sustainable development to its unabated "sustainable" conclusion, we
are looking at water reuse and conservation which ends in the per capita
rationing of water and other resources (energy, gHg emissions, etc.) for all of
us except perhaps a select few. A distinction is made between water for man and
water for nature which supports this scarcity. No more lawns, swimming pools,
Saturday afternoon car washes, or long hot showers. These water uses are likely
not "sustainable".
In my view, Plan Bay Area, our nine County sustainable
community strategy, with other regional initiatives implemented by the Joint
Policy Committee (JPC/JPA) creates scarcity, ultimately, as a means of control.
http://www.abag.ca.gov/jointpolicy/
For a broader view on this issue: "The Unfinished
Agenda", a Task Force Report sponsored by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund is
The Citizen's Policy Guide to Environmental Issues. "The Unfinished
Agenda" report states on page 155 that "this book is about a world
transition from abundance to scarcity." www.geraldbarney.com/Rockefeller_Brothers_Fund/Unfinished.pdf
This Task Force was part of the Environmental Quality
Council that grew out of the U.S. Congressional legislation: The National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/
Another report that may be of interest is the 1969
Rockefeller Commission report titled: "Population and the American
Future". This report signed off by President Richard M. Nixon, when Nelson
Rockefeller was Vice-President, includes the following quote in the Preface:
"Whether man’s response to that challenge will be a cause for pride or for
despair in the year 2000 will depend very much on what we do today." http://www.population-security.org/rockefeller/001_population_growth_and_the_american_future.htm
Personally, I think the year 2000 came and went without a
lot of fanfare. In my view, there are many aspects to these reports that are
not relevant or are an effort to create and/or respond to a reality which does
not exist.
If I understand correctly, NEPA is the
legislative/governmental mechanism which brought environmentalism to the world
stage and then back to the USA through the 1992 UN Earth Summit and Agenda 21,
the Biodiversity Assessment and President Clinton's: President's Council on
Sustainable Development Towards a Sustainable America report and then locally
as Plan Bay Area. The "soft law" of sustainable development is
becoming "hard law" which each State law that is passed to support
it's implementation.
"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force."-George Washington
Regarding population, as I understand it there are two
aspects: our own children and our nation's immigration policy. These people
will need land, food, water, a place to live work and raise their own families.
Do we grow vertically as we are now being coerced with RHNA/PDA's, or do we
grow horizontally, developing more suburban land that is currently in rural
areas?
What do we want to do? We the people, have some difficult
decisions to make. We may want to work on getting the ABAG population
projections reduced which are more than a million over natural trends in
population growth for our nine counties. We may also want to oppose the $11
billion dollar water bond measure planned for the November ballot. If our 45
organizations want to consider working on these issues with their members, I
think we can have a real impact.
The climate is changing, the seas are rising; all hell
will break loose if we don't do something to save the planet, save the children
or enslave ourselves to ensure world peace. Lot's of dire predictions and
generalities are used to manipulate the masses to impose programs which benefit
those advancing the solutions. Could it be about money, power and control? :)
Those who have studied history know that "in the
course of human events": something happens in the world, all the time,
everyday and the sky does not fall. People die, people fight, people suffer,
people thrive, people are happy, people struggle in this life to find meaning,
comfort and fulfillment as they meet their basic needs and then some. This is
the human condition.
As I understand it, today we have more people living
better, longer, richer, more peaceful lives than at any time in history. To me,
this is good news. I'm optimistic we can address our social and environmental
challenges using our constitutional self-government system to make our lives
better still, retain our rights and help others do the same.
We change what we can (acting respectfully), accept what
we cannot change and hope we have the wisdom to know the difference.
I think many of us do our best to be good people, help
where we can and enjoy the precious gifts of love, life and freedom.
I'm not letting anyone take my rights and freedoms away
from me without a fight.
All the best,
"a friend"
No comments:
Post a Comment